Mink
This image was created at Cayuga lake in Ithaca, New York on 3/24/18. Basically a grab shot of this mink. Saw a mink and grabbed a couple frames. The sticks and the bright spots on the rocks don't help. Image adjustments in Lightroom and Photoshop.
Hand held, Big crop.
Canon 5D MarkIV
Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
600mm
ISO 3200
f8.0
1/400sec
John do like this Mink with the water droplets on it's head and inquisitive pose,lovely detail.Tiny nit not that you could do a lot about it but the stick protruding does draw my eye to it,very much enjoyed viewing this.
Keith.
John you certainly have a knack of finding some great subjects, I really like the image. I would definitely eliminate that twig on RHS (try content aware fill). Also is the colour temp a bit off, it looks a bit blue to me especially the rocks and snow on LHS... should the mink be a bit more brown??
Hi John - What a great find and an element of cuteness too! I know those rocks have a blueish tint to the veins in them but I agree that the WB seems to be off with an overall blue cast to the image. Here's a rp in which all I did was adjust the WB using the eye dropper. I do wish that the oof rock in the fg wasn't so big but nothing you can do about it. The sticks are unfortunate but they were there.
TFS,
Rachel
The big crop has hurt the IQ of the image sadly John and as presented I would have gone tighter, but the IQ isn't there even at this size.
TFS
Steve
PS Did you get the MKIV?
Pretty good especially for a grab shot, John. Rachel's work on the WB has helped lift this one. Yes, the setting is not ideal but the look on the mink really lifts this.
I'm having a some trouble seeing the IQ issues with this one, Steve. Can you point me to the parts or issues I should be watching for on this? BTW John, how much is a 'big' crop in this instance? Can you quantify?Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski
Hey Steve,
Yes i have the MarkIV now.
Thanks Glenn, Probably around 50-60 percent.
Hi Glenn, OK here goes, but also without seeing the Crs file I am having to make certain assumptions too.I'm having a some trouble seeing the IQ issues with this one, Steve. Can you point me to the parts or issues I should be watching for on this?
1. Crop 50% of file
Immediately you have lost 50% of data and so you are now working with only 50% of the original data captured. If you try to print you are limited to how far you can go. You want to frame the subject in camera and give yourself say 10-15% (personal choice) of latitude for final presentation.
2. SS
At that distance HH even a fraction of camera shake, sharpness could take a knock and if you loose 50% of the data... and so you are magnifying any flaws. Therefore it may have required more sharpening and has in part slight crunchy appearance
3. Exposure
How much was it to the right, was the file lifted introducing any noise in the shadows/darks, this could also affect the overall look at presentation.
4. Focus Point
The subject is set/positioned to the bottom LHC, did the crop do this, or was the subject more central. If framed originally sharpness will drop off (Glenn you might want to check MTF charts for lenses and their corresponding Sagittal and Meridian lens Curves, as I seem to remember you have a more technical background)
5. Processing
Subject to how the image is processed, artifacts could be introduced, with LR there is stuff that is done behind the scenes, not sure if this also applies to ACR but for instance Contrast is added, likewise sharpening in various degrees, subject to if you are a Canon or Nikon shooter. It may say Default 25, but this number will vary behind the scenes. Controlling the Contrast is key as it kills the Midtown where all your sharpness is.
Glenn to me the fact it's cropped hard and to a degree pixel bashed just kills the image, John, if would like to Dropbox the original I would be happy to take a look and see if there are parts that he could improve the original file.
John, congrats on the MKIV a great camera, but I would strongly suggest you check the sharpness, there is a PDF Canon do provide where you shoot a subject, preferably a brick wall at 50m wide open, single shot, on a tripod... etc etc. The MKiV's I have seen and used all needed AFMA, - Static was one setting, moving subjects another, once done it delivers stunning images and if I had the cash I would buy a third body this one. In addition, understanding what Tracking sensitivity does & Accel/Decel is critical as it refers to your subject & the camera workings and will aid nailing the captures.
Hi John a cool subject and the head on view is great , he does look curious .
There are some less ideal subjects in the frame , but what can you ... part of nature , I would leave them .
Issues about color and IQ are already well covered , in which i partly agree .
Anyway a nice frame of a cute subject , so well done in getting the shot.
TFS Andreas
Andreas if you too care to chime in that would be helpful, as the tech stuff is then not just coming from one POV.Issues about color and IQ are already well covered , in which i partly agree .
Hey Steve ...you have covered that well , nothing more to add from my side . Need to come back onto track ...havenīt looked at images for quite a while. So i ask to be a bit patient with me
Steve, thanks for spending the time to outline these issues. Although I'm aware of what can cause IQ issues, what my question was about were some telltale signs in the image presented that indicated IQ issues. You do mention some crunchiness and possible over-sharpening, although I don't really see that... but you have a more experienced eye. About all I could spot was that the background looks like it could do with a tad more noise reduction but it's not jumping out at me either - no surprise at ISO 3200 given the relatively high pixel count (and hence small physical pixel size) of this body. Many thanks again.
OK, you just said 'patly agree' so I wondered if there was anything more to add.Hey Steve ...you have covered that well , nothing more to add from my side . Need to come back onto track ...havenīt looked at images for quite a while. So i ask to be a bit patient with me
Glenn, the main thing is don't crop hard, but each change we make has a knock on affect. Fieldcraft and getting closer to your subject also helps, Stu P is very good at fieldcraft and can get close, so creating an image (as you know) is a culmination of many things. ISO these days isn't so much of an issue, Andreas and I can shoot very happily at 12,800, 16,000, plus providing the image is exposed correctly and you keep cropping to a minimum, you just need to understand how you process the image accordingly.
Thanks again Steve. We could have a debate about cropping (which I'm not afraid to do) but I don't think this is the place to go into a lot of detail. I will be highjacking John's critiques and feedback. In short, if an image is only intended for online use and is never going to be printed or seen large, then cropping shouldn't be a problem. It just represents a limit of what can be done with an image. And how many of us actually do more with our images than post them online on forums like this? So it's really about fitness for purpose in my books.
Regarding getting close, I agree that is generally good but there is a twist to this tale! I have found myself too close in quite a few cases too, especially with birds. This causes grief with DOF (that no amount of stopping down will fix). So there is a balancing act there and one reason I like having a zoom to pull back and increase my DOF at the same time. The background and bokeh suffer though. Again, nothing is simple.
OK guys, John very kindly forwarded the RAW without asking so here we go:
Camera setting WB stick it on Auto otherwise things will become misleading
AF system if you had the cross set it ob that for this
Cases, now these may have change compared to the IDX MKII, if not then I may have slowed things down a bit and set auto switching to zero
Continuous shooting, might have slowed it down
Picture style, well this should not affect the image if you process in LR or ACR, but personally I don't have it applied and manually change it
Image is sharp at the RAW stage perfect!!!
Now from LR
WB was set to 10k that was the neutral point, then manually dropped it to what I thought it looked OK at 8575k (remember these figure will look different if you use ACR, C1 etc)
Histogram looked OK but in LR -1 stop looked better, personal choice
Very slight tweak of Colour, Saturation reduce some Contrast, Blacks, general Exp sliders etc
Minimal input sharpening, subject almost in centre of focusing, maximises sharpness - great
Export to PS, so slight tweaks, removal of twigs, back to LR, cropped, export, sharpened, job done.
The Blue cast was from the WB setting.
Colour all subjective as I wasn't there, cropping can change too.
Hope this helps John, but overall the file looks good just change some settings and get to know more about LR, it really will help you and your images in the long run as you can see the difference. Sorry to be so brief, its almost 11.00pm and time for my CoCo and bedtime story.
All the best and thanks for the file.
BTW John, I think it's slightly rear focusing the MKIII, the eyes and ears are sharp, the nose isn't, and I know where the FP were placed. It's certainly something you DO NEED to check on the MKIV IMHO.
Alright i will check into that. Thanks again for the work on the raw. I believe i have lost my hat.
FWIW John, keep to AWB and if you want to change things to see the look you can do so in the Raw converter, but I think it's leading up the wrong path and misleading you. I would also review your PP as it is creating some elements the image can do without and it will look better overall. If you want to send a screen grab of the Modules with LR fine, but a lot may stem from the Exposure Module.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote